DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Gamet's Estate v. Lindner, 106 So. 22.

23 citing documents.

  • Board of Com'rs of Orleans Levee Dist. v. Gomez 621 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
  • Phillips v. Abney 377 So. 2d 1314 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
    *MCCCXCVI 658 , (1925), and Jones v. Town of Pineville, 200 So.
  • Ducote v. City of New Orleans 176 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
    Plaintiff contends the tax sale -was valid, relying on (1) Gamet’s Estate v. *200 Lindner, , 106 So.
  • Board of Commissioners v. P. M. Realty Co. 146 So. 2d 21 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
  • Heirs of Boagni v. Thornton 132 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    471 ; Garnet’s , 106 So.
  • New Orleans N.E. R. Co. v. Redmann 28 So. 2d 303 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
    28 ; Gamet's Estate v. Lindner, 159 La., 658 , and other cases.
  • Guidry v. Sigler 21 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
  • Jones v. Town of Pineville 200 So. 38 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1941
    291 , and Garnet’s , 106 So.
  • Touchstone v. Comer 183 So. 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    In our opinion, the case of Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • State Ex Rel. Westover Realty Co. v. City of New Orleans 182 So. 329 La. 1938
    e as concurrent privileges on the property, and hence no adjudication of the property under a sale for the compulsory payment of State taxes will extinguish the liens of the city for its taxes, when the price of the adjudication is not sufficient, on a proportional distribution between the city and State, to pay to the State the full amount of its taxes.” In the case of Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • Johnson v. Chapman 183 So. 285 La. 1938
    The reason we ordered the case up was that counsel for relators made the following allegation in their application for writs: “The decision of the Court of Appeal in this case and the cases cited by it in support thereof, all court of Appeal Cases, are contrary to law and the decision of this the Supreme Court, in Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • Johnson v. Chapman 179 So. 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    Appellees call our attention to the fact that Neal v. Pitre, supra, was expressly overruled by the Supreme Court in Garnet’s , 106 So.
  • State Ex Rel. Chess & Wymond Co. v. Grace 175 So. 825 La. 1937
    Section 62 of Act No. 170 of 1898, as amended by Act No. 72 of 1928; Act No. 85 of 1888; Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • State Ex Rel. Tulane Homestead Ass'n v. Montgomery 171 So. 28 La. 1936
    Section 62 of Act No. 170 of 1898, as amended by Act No. 72 of 1928; Act No. 85 of 1888; Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • Peters v. Twogood 167 So. 206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1936
    60 F. 974 , and Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • State Ex Rel. Huggett v. Montgomery 167 So. 147 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    It permitted the owner, or other person interested, his legatee, et cetera, to redeem the property adjudicated to the state within twelve months, “provided, no certificate of redemption shall be issued by the auditor until all taxes, State, parochial and municipal, due up to the day of redemption have been paid on said property.” In the case of Garnet’s , 106 So.
  • Police Jury of Parish of Jefferson Davis v. Grace 161 So. 22 La. 1935
    It was virtually so held in Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • Lomel Realty Corporation v. Chopin 148 So. 683 La. 1933
    663 and 664, , it is said: “The purpose of toe law in authorizing an adjudication for unpaid taxes to either taxing authority, the state or one of its subdivisions, is, primarily, to secure the taxes due on the property adjudicated without impairment of the lien of either.
  • Lomel Realty Corp. v. Chopin 148 So. 683 La. 1933
    In Garnet’s Estate v. Lindner, 159 La, 663 and 664, , it is said: "The purpose of the law in authorizing an adjudication for unpaid taxes to either taxing authority, the state or one of its subdivisions, is, primarily, to secure the taxes due on the property adjudicated without impairment of the lien of either.
  • Lindner v. Cotonio 143 So. 286 La. 1932
    65S, , whereby a previously unmerchantable title was perfected.
  • Lindner v. Cotonio 143 So. 286 La. 1932
    But he apparently purposely delayed and remained silent until after a favorable decision was rendered by this court in the suit of Gamet’s , 106 So.
  • Vernon Parish Lumber Co. v. Word 128 So. 522 La. 1930
    661 , , that the depositing of a copy of the assessment rolls in the office of the clerk and the depositing of another copy with the tax collector become effective simultaneously.
  • Paratore v. Davis 3 La. App. 499 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
    Whatever merit there may have been in this contention is, admittedly, swept aside by the decision in' the case of Garnet’s Estate vs. Lindner, , 106 South.